Write about law, like a pro

(la version française suit)

In her mind, the request will kill two birds with one stone: clients will know the firm’s members are current about the latest developments in the law, and it’ll be a good opportunity to see if you have what it takes to write reports directly to clients. Let’s face it, young lawyers are not known for their writing prowess. Senior lawyers have told me incessantly that new lawyers cannot spell, let alone string two sentences together. “This is a test!” you have to say to yourself. And it is. This is your chance to get noticed – so grab it.

Most case comments are dull

There is no point writing for the public, if the reader needs to hire a lawyer to make sense of it. As a lawyer, you want to inform. As a business person, you want to whet clients’ appetites, to make them consider calling your office about the problems on their desks. There is no point in writing to be understood only by other lawyers. In fact, writing for other lawyers should not make them work like lawyers to understand what you’re saying.

Most case summaries or commentaries written by lawyers for public consumption tend to be as dry as dust, out of fear of making errors. Or they have been beaten into pulp by a firm editor used to “drafting” and not writing. As a result, a piece intended to help clients understand they might need to hire a lawyer ends up losing the reader’s attention. Whether you are a corporate law associate or a Supreme Court judge, writing is an act of persuasion. To be persuasive, your writing has to appeal to both logic and emotion. Old-school journalists invented the art of capturing a reader’s attention and conveying the facts within 15 to 30 inches of newspaper column. Can you do that with a run-of-the mill Supreme Court decision which did not make it into the Toronto Star?

Mastering the ‘Lede’

The most important part of a story is the lede. (That’s a misspelled form of the word “lead,” typographically altered circa 1965 to distinguish this meaning from the molten lead used in typesetting machines.) For a journalist, a lede is a technical marvel. A good one can mesmerize a reader into thinking the rest of the story is riveting. Usually that effect is enough to carry the reader for about 10 inches—meaning the end better be good, too. The classic form of the lede is the “four graph lede.” A “graph” can be a paragraph but can be the constituent parts of a well-crafted longer paragraph. They are distinct portions of an introduction which appeal to the human brain’s ability to (1) notice the story, (2) understand it, (3) recognize its importance and then (4) emotionally desire to know more.

Elements of the Four-Graph Lede

The first graph should be a matter-of-fact statement. Journalists think in terms of the Four W’s of writing: Who did What, Where, and When. The classic news story is a fire or bank robbery. Here is my retelling of the historical case of the return of Toronto bank robber Ewin Boyd (pictured above), from serving in the Canadian Forces in World War II:

“Edwin Boyd robbed a Toronto branch of the Bank of Montreal with a gun on September 9, 1949.”

The second graph should add flesh to the first, or paint a vivid picture.

“Boyd, a convict, had just returned from active service fighting Hitler’s forces. He held up the branch while drunk with a German Luger pistol. The gunman escaped with $3,000.”

Then third graph is actually the hook explaining why the story is relevant to the reader. Despite its weak position in the sequence, often overlooked as ‘filler,’ its importance as a transition piece is that it appeals to the reader’s rational mind by giving them a logical reason to read further.

“Police have warned that Boyd remains at large and is considered ‘armed and dangerous.’”

The fourth graph should light up the story with a quote or other testamentary anchor. There is nothing like a good quote or a dramatic new statistic to give the reader an emotional impetus to continue reading. It is for this reason that reporters, when interviewing you, will always seek out a good quote. This is what I mean:

“He handed me a folded cheque. When I opened it, it read: HOLD-UP. If you don’t want to be a dead hero, fill this sack with money,” said teller Mavis Beacon. “I called the manager. He asked him whether this was a joke, and he pulled out a gun and pointed it at him.”

Put it all together and you might get:

Edwin Boyd robbed a Toronto branch of the Bank of Montreal with a gun on September 9, 1949. Boyd, a convict, had just returned from active service fighting Hitler’s forces. He held up the branch while drunk with a German Luger pistol. The gunman escaped with $3,000. Police have warned that Boyd remains at large and is considered ‘armed and dangerous.’ “He handed me a folded cheque. When I opened it, it read: HOLD-UP. If you don’t want to be a dead hero, fill this sack with money,” said teller Mavis Beacon. “I called the manager. He asked him whether this was a joke, and he pulled out a gun and pointed it at him.”

Applying the style to your legal article or case comment

Getting back to your web article about a recent legal development, a bit of practice will prove that the stylistic elements of a legal story are no different from a bank robbery or a four-alarm fire. Instead of a technical monograph on the nuances of a recent Supreme Court decision, why not appeal to the ability of lay people, including sophisticated corporate clients, to understand a legal news story if put into clear, non-technical terms:

The Supreme Court of Canada handed down its ruling in Progressive Homes v. Lombard, on September 23, 2010. The decision may have presented the top court its last opportunity to consider British Columbia’s ‘leaky condo’ litigation as a backdrop for clarifying the law of liability insurance exclusions. We at Smart Law LLP have been following this case closely for the construction industry, because our clients have been telling us insurers have tightened up their interpretation of exclusion clauses for faulty workmanship claims. “We were very concerned the Supreme Court might leave many of our clients without insurance coverage,” Smart Law LLP senior partner Nancy Smart told a gathering of the Ontario Bar Association’s Construction Law Section. “We can now breathe a sigh of relief. The Supreme Court has given us a roadmap to respond to recent trends in insurance company denials and reservations of rights.”